Hi everyone
I have always felt that Pirsig in his SODV paper was forced to
come up with an easy way of representing subjects and objects using
the MoQ. It's as if his paper was to be denied publication at the
conference without it. So, he put in in there, but he used the
terms subjective and objective as in subject-ish and object-ish.
(I'm actually trying to come up with an excuse for him here
because I think it's utterly false to say that the top two levels
are subjects and the lower two are objects.)
The quality event is according to the MoQ the source where the
subject and the object is created. Further, each quality event
is a one-level event, i.e. only one type of patterns are involved.
An inorganic quality event produces an inorganic subject and an
inorganic object, a biological quality event produces a biological
subject and a biological object and so on.
So how can subjects only exist in the two top levels and objects
only in the lower two levels???
They simply don't! It's wrong. Forget all about it!
The reason many people think so, (and also the reason Pirsig
put them there in the SODV paper I guess), is just that it
so closely matches the SOM mind/matter split. It makes it
easier to convert from SOM to MoQ which of course might be a
good excuse to put them there in the SODV paper. (Although
in the long run I think it backfires.)
What the MoQ says here is that subjects and objects are created
at each quality event at every level but we usually concentrate
on either the subject or the object depending on the level
involved. It's us that focus on the subject at quality events
of the top two levels and on the object at quality events of
the bottom two levels, hence subject-ish and object-ish. This
division doesn't come from the MoQ,
Magnus
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:31 BST